My Sandy Hook rant

For the sake of my Facebook friends, I’m going to try to get this out of my system now, and let it go:

F*** the children of Sandy Hook. You’ve played the compassion card once too often.

Don’t get me wrong. My heart aches just as much as yours does. Maybe more, because 6 and 7 is getting a little old for Limbo, and I have no way to know how many of those kids were baptised. To most of you, they just don’t exist anymore. I know they exist; the question is where, and in what state? I think of my own grandchildren, as far as I know unbaptized, and past the age of reason, and their grandfather, who hasn’t done squat about it. And because of that, what can I say to you anti-gun Christians who want to bulletproof children’s bodies, but not their souls? How can I know that the stopped clock of the Westboro heretics isn’t right for once, and those children are in Hell?

And those bodies? You gave the prudential decision on how best to protect school children from nutcases to a government which is down with killing children, and demands that I pay for others to do so. And you want to give them even more prudential power in that matter?  That didn’t work so well this time; do you think it will work any better the next time?  When that government which is cool with abortion comes for your mom, for the handicapped, for the Jews/blacks/conservatives/Presbyterians/whatever, what are you going to do, when they have all the guns?

But we’re going to water their graves with our sentimental tears, because 31st-trimester abortions are somehow worse than 1st-trimester abortions. I guess that until somebody loves you, you’re just a product of conception. And we’ll slick up the dance floor with their blood so everyone can do the gun-ban dance, so they can look righteous in public and be seen to have “done something.”

The worst are the businesses. Cerberus I cut some slack to, because they’ve taken a political shekel, and he who pays the piper calls the tune. But Walmart? Dicks? And especially Cheaper Than Dirt, flipping the bird at their customer base? Why the preemptory apology for something they had no hand in?

Virtually every mass shooter has been taking psychiatric medications with side effects of violence and delusion. Nobody in the mainstream media is talking about banning them. Freedom Group (makers of Nancy Lanza’s Bushmaster) had sales of $775 million in 2011. Novartis (maker of Fanapt, Adam’s drug) had sales of  $58 BILLION in 2011. You do the math. Big Pharma is a LOT bigger than Big Firearm, but just as culpable. [UPDATE: Lanza may not have been on Fanapt, but was probably on something else; my point still stands.]

Speaking of Nancy Lanza, how do you like the “survivalist” slur? They say that like it’s a BAD thing. Oh yeah, she was paranoid, so no wonder her kid was a nutbar.  It’s not paranoia if rational analysis shows you that we’re headed for trouble. And if your analysis doesn’t show you that, you’re not rational. Now, I’m not impressed with Mrs. Lanza as a prepper. With a $200k/yr divorce settlement and no job holding her down, there are much safer places she could have lived than New York City’s ileum (coastal NJ being its rectum). If she was harboring the mentally ill, why weren’t her guns locked up, preferably mostly off-premises? Why indeed (except for parental love) have a dangerous adult under your roof at all? We’ll never get an answer; survival FAIL.

Well, fine, friends. I’ve thrown dielectic at your rhetoric for five days now, to no avail.  I get better arguments out of those grandgirls: “Grampa, can I have some gun control?” “No. Why?” “Cause” “Cause why?” “Cause I want it.” You’re going to get your gun control, if not now, then in 6 months or a year when martial law is declared. And the guns will remain uncontrolled, and the shootings will continue, because I have a moral obligation to protect my family, and some people think they have no moral obligations at all. Have fun with your kitchen knives and baseball bats, when society collapses because of institutionalized sin.


6 Responses to My Sandy Hook rant

  1. jeffrey smith says:

    Well, to take the lowest hanging fruit first–God exists, and therefore Hell does not, because to be in Hell is to exist separated from God, which is an impossibility. (To be more scholastic about it: you can not define Hell in any way consonant with the classical Christian conception which does not contradict the Oneness of God. At most you can define in the Jewish way–as a place of punishments limited in duration and intensity, although the intensity is extreme compared to mortal pain–or the Seventh Adventist way, in which the second death is exactly that: the sinner ceases to exist, period. Therefore we can be certain that these children are not in Hell.
    Second: If Grandpa takes some water, sloshes it on the head of Grandchild, and says the appropriate verbal formula (“I baptize thee in the name of, etc.), Grandchild is validly baptized under Canon Law. For a classic example of this, see the Mortara case in Italy in the 19th century. (When you read up on it, you’ll be correct in surmising I’m not picking that case at random.)
    Third: to think that any gunowner or group of gunowners, however large, can successfully outgun the government is a fantasy. Do you think it will less willing to kill you than it does Kathy Johnston or any fetus in the sixth month of pregnancy?
    Fourth: every medicine has side effects, and the people who act out the violent side effects are a very small percentage of those that take the drug. Possessors of guns, OTOH, who use the guns for violence against others, are a much larger percentage of those who possess guns. And Novartis’s revenues come from a lot of drugs, of which psychotropics are only one part. How much of Freedom Group’s revenues did not come from the manufacture/sale of firearms?
    Fifth: Mrs.Lanza: well, you’re mostly correct, with judgment reserved on how much trouble and what type we’re actually headed towards. Myself, I expect something like a muddling along sort of hard times like the Russians experienced after Gorbachev. And suburban CT is generally a “safe” place.
    Now off to argue in the music forum with an Aussie who thinks Oz’s gun prohibition scheme is just fine and dandy. (As he explained it, to own a gun one needs a permit from the police, and to get the permit one needs a reason–a farmer or hunter dealing with feral animals, for example. Basic self defense against feral humans does not (if his list is correct) count as an acceptable reason.)

  2. jeffreyquick says:

    1. If one can’t choose to be separated from God, isn’t that a violation of free will?
    2. I’m aware that I can baptize the girls. Nobody pretends that it’s the optimum situation. There’s a limit to what I can do with them one weekend a month. However, their mom and stepdad are getting married Sat., so perhaps there’ll be a turn towards normalcy.
    3. Any insurgency anywhere is an uphill battle, but they do sometimes succeed. Conditions here are better in some ways (lotsa guns!) and worse in others (hard to win hearts and minds of a populace which would rather watch reality TV). But it will be an extremely nasty process, esp. now with GPS, drones, etc.
    4. The guns don’t shoot themselves. Nor are they the only instrumentality for mass murder. Given that there’s no explicit constitutional protection for taking drugs, and a bureaucracy that exists solely for approving or denying the sale of drugs, SSRI control makes at least a much sense as gun control.
    5. I suspect that Soviet muddle is the best-case scenario. Any sufficiently severe and prolonged interruption in trade would do it nationally (EMP disaster, hyperinflation). If the EBT cards don’t work, Hell will be out for recess before not-long.

  3. jeffrey smith says:

    “everything is in the hands of Heaven except the fear of Heaven” (Pirkei Avot)
    Free will comes in only at the level of autonomous decision. We have the capacity to delude ourselves that there is no God, and that we are separate from Him; and then suffer the consequences of that delusion in the realm of autonomous experience, but we can exist apart from Him even when we think we are existing apart from Him. But if we actually existed apart from Him, then we ourselves would Gods (see snake to Eve for one way to phrase the idea), because we would exist self sufficiently, and therefore it would not be true that He is One, whereas, as it says in Deutornomy 4, “under heaven and on earth, there is ain od nothing else.”

  4. jeffrey smith says:

    Correction for typo time
    we can NOT exist apart from Him even when we think we are existing apart from Him

  5. Jeffrey Quick says:

    OK, it seems we’re in agreement. The dependent existence of Man does not negate free will, nor does it negate Hell. The reprobate wants life without God, and God is willing to grant that. But the reprobate must still be connected to God through existence, since if God didn’t grant him existence, he wouldn’t be able to live without God, in this life or the next. Nice paradox.

  6. bloodyspartan says:

    First of all there is more to this than we will Know.
    Second and Final a Janitor with a Gun would have finished Him and then gone back to work.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: